Germany reinstates Border Controls - Temporarily exits from Schengen

Status
Not open for further replies.
You realize that many of the refugees may want to go to a different country then the one the quota has randomly assigned them ? You'd end up with the refugees either in de facto prisons or tough border controls anyway.
That might be true, but outside of family reunification I don't see a good reason for them to deny staying in a certain country. If they are safe and provided for, the country should not matter. And if it does, they should be sent back, since then it is not about safety anymore, but economics.

A lot of people want a lot of things. Millions upon millions of people want to move to the EU, US, Australia, etc, but they are denied. It should be no different here, no matter what these people want.

Of course they can cross the border, but if they are placed in let's say Poland, they will not receive housing and support if they decide to cross to Germany.

Update: Hungary might extend border fence to Romanian border - http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/15/europe-migrants-hungary-romania-idUSL5N11L2DI20150915

This is going great... If this continues we will have a new Iron Curtain, just a little more to the east.
 
You realize that many of the refugees may want to go to a different country then the one the quota has randomly assigned them ? You'd end up with the refugees either in de facto prisons or tough border controls anyway.

Are the refugees choosing a European vacation destination or fleeing a war zone?
 
I've been traveling Europe as an American for the past month and it's really weirded me out that nobody checks any official papers as you cross international borders. Is that what this is threatening to change?

I visited Germany just in time, apparently. Got out last week and will just be flying back to go home.
 
I've been traveling Europe as an American for the past month and it's really weirded me out that nobody checks any official papers as you cross international borders. Is that what this is threatening to change?

I visited Germany just in time, apparently. Got out last week and will just be flying back to go home.

Germany is not reintroducing general passport/ID controls for flights within the EU... this is about the Border to Austria because this is the main route for asylum seekers.

And it is right now aimed at people crossing the border in the direction of Germany, although in practice people traveling to Austria are also affected. Not everybody is being controlled, the police and border officers are looking for cars with certain license plates, trains etc.

The thread title is incorrect and a total hyperbole.

And most importantly: The refugees are not being sent back! They are already on German soil when being checked, in Bavaria to be precise. So legally they couldn't even be sent back. This is not the whole point in the border controls. The point is to register refugees and to spread them across the German states, so not all of them stay in Bavaria or go on traveling to Berlin, for example. In the end Germany is doing within the country what the EU should do on a multinational level.

Please get your facts straight people...
 
Germany has ignored the refugee and immigration situation for decades, leaving e.g. the southern European countries mostly to themselves. There's articles from more than ten years ago about the enormous problems of European refugee policy, you can find articles (even in German) from 2004 about this.

So you want equality for everyone, and yet you're OK with Germany not taking any more refugees because Merkel wants so.

Germany can and will grant asylum to those who actually have a right for it. However, as per EU regulations, the country where the refugees arrive first is responsible for them. What's been happening though is that hungary and austria send them towards other countries, usually Germany and Sweden.

Closing the borders was a necissary step. No city can take over 10k refugees on a daily basis.

This is not about actually dealing with the situation, this is in part a (laughable) move for the German government to show to their own people that they are working hard on the matter, as well as a move to try and push the problem back to other countries.

Most (Northern) European countries are not interested in a fair and honest agreement. They're interested in unloading the problem onto other countries. Europe and Germany are reaping the result of misguided policies, both internally (integration policy) and externally (foreign aid, foreign policy, migration policy).

BS. Germany is pushing for a ratio, how many refugees should be taken in by each EU country, which would result in Germany taking in the most. It's actually countries like Poland who are against it.

Whatever, I expect the borders to be opened again, they just need to find some places to take in all these refugees. I'm actually impressed how fast this goes. One week ahead, there is a small notice (if there is anything at all lol) that they will build a refugee camp near your location. All of a sudden a shitload of trucks come and go and within 3 days you have a new camp build from containers and tents, containing showers, a messhall (place to eat) and so on. For ~1000 people. The thing is, with 10k people per day, we need to distribute them all over the country and a system like this takes some time. Some refugees have to sleep on the floor in these shelters and due to the long wait (processing the asylum papers), food plans get repetitive, which is unacceptable by german standards.

After seeing how other refugee camps in Hungary got rations tossed into the crowd, as if the refugees were animals, I actually believe it's better if they arrive in germany. We still have few nazis, but the majority actually helps out and treats the refugees for what they are - human beings. This is also the only reason why Munich was able to handle such a large number. A lot of good will from the citizens who distributed food and stuff like sleeping bags.

On a side note: the USA only take 70k? 75k? refugees per year. That was the last week in Munich.
 
Germany can and will grant asylum to those who actually have a right for it. However, as per EU regulations, the country where the refugees arrive first is responsible for them. What's been happening though is that hungary and austria send them towards other countries, usually Germany and Sweden.

The Dublin agreement has been the excuse to ignore the problem that affected (massively disproportionately) the southern European countries for decades.

Germany could have worked with other countries for a fair and reasonable solution, but since the problem barely affected them, they decided to ignore it. To quote the German Federal Interior Minister Friedrich from 2011: "Italien muss sein Flüchtlingsproblem selbst regeln" ("Italy must solve its refugee problem on its own.").

BS. Germany is pushing for a ratio, how many refugees should be taken in by each EU country, which would result in Germany taking in the most. It's actually countries like Poland who are against it.´

Germany has been against a fair solution, has been against a quote/ratio for decades. They are only pushing for a ratio now that they are affected. It's hypocrisy. This problem, these refugees didn't come out of nowhere.
 
You realize that many of the refugees may want to go to a different country then the one the quota has randomly assigned them ?

Sorry but i don't agree with this at all.
I mean how do you not see what is right know happening with Germany closing its borders is exactly because of this naive and unrealistic view that everyone can choose their dream destination Germany?

If you are in a save country be glad and be actually thankful and don't be so downright brazen to demand you can travel through 3 or 4 SAVE countries to your dream destination because at that point let's not kid ourselves you become a economic refugee not to mention that you basically strain the goodwill and helpfulness of the native population.
 
Why is everyone saying that borders are closed, when they are not?
German border is not exactly closed. Hungarian border is now from what I can tell. This is today:

CO747H_WIAAMQju.jpg
 
Sorry but i don't agree with this at all.
I mean how do you not see what is right know happening with Germany closing its borders is exactly because of this naive and unrealistic view that everyone can choose their dream destination Germany?

If you are in a save country be glad and be actually thankful and don't be so downright brazen to demand you can travel through 3 or 4 SAVE countries to your dream destination because at that point let's not kid ourselves you become a economic refugee not to mention that you basically strain the goodwill and helpfulness of the native population.

Sorry but how would this work? If refugees would only stay in the first countries where they would be safe. Europe would have zero refugees. I guess thats what people want
 
Are the refugees choosing a European vacation destination or fleeing a war zone?

It depends on who you want to believe.

Lefty-gaf claims they are fleeing from war and no one can deny them the right to choose where they want to be, but on the other side they say to distribute them against their will through the whole eu, one handily revoking them the right to meet up with "friends and family".

Right-gaf sees them mostly as economical imigrants, as they only want to go to countries which are liberal and give big social benefits, while avoiding poorer, but also safe countries.
 
If you listen again, the callers aren't saying they're all gonna be rapists/murderers/criminals/etc. They're saying that some could be, and the people being asked to have them in their homes don't know because people aren't being investigated first. Germany has already proven that simply throwing the doors open and saying, "Come on in!" is a terrible idea. It doesn't even have to be refugees. The point is if you took any random group of a million people and dumped them in an area and told the locals there, "You have to take these people in," people are going to wonder who the heck these people are. And the answer is, "We dunno." For many people that's not acceptable.

Saying people are being unreasonable for asking for an orderly, safe immigration process is not "fear-mongering." What's unacceptable is trying to make the issue a black-and-white, "either you agree to do anything and everything for immigrants or you're a murderous psychopath with blood on your hands who enjoys the sight of dead children" issue. The host on that show was basically saying to anybody who had an issue with the policy that if they had any reservations that they were "okay with kids dying." Come on.

It is definitely fear-mongering and inflammatory when a guy is entertaining the possibility that these people might be rapists, murderers, thieves, or smoochers. It props such a situation up as a likely possibility. It's Donald Trump logic and it only worsens the conversation by *insisting* that this will be the case.

How about this: What if these people are just regular people like everyone else? What if all they want is to earn a living, support their family, put bread on the table, and live a happy content life away from war, misery, and conflict? What then? And you let them stay outside Fortress Europa because the wealthiest countries in the world will suddenly collapse from all the Brown people?

I never said I supported the callers, however, it's clear the host had an agenda .... Callers complaining about emotional blackmail only to be emotionally blackmailed by the host ...

With that said the callers seem to fear refugees are not being vetted properly albeit the callers getting hyperbolic. Regardless given the mass numbers flooding in is this not a reasonable concern? I don't know what the answer is to be honest. I do think though the host countries populace deserve to have a say. The unfortunate truth is that I suspect that "say" will be to close the borders with force if nessecary. I'm not European though, what say you Euro-GAF on the front lines of this?

I agree that there should be a procedure or process that ensures safety and health for both refugees and the societies involved.

The "emotional blackmail" is just an euphemism for "appealing to my empathetic capabilities". Being emotionally affected over other people dying because of your actions is what a normally functioning human being does. Trying to reduce or shut down this feeling just turns us into monsters.
 
You realize that many of the refugees may want to go to a different country then the one the quota has randomly assigned them ? You'd end up with the refugees either in de facto prisons or tough border controls anyway.

Sorry but how would this work? If refugees would only stay in the first countries where they would be safe. Europe would have zero refugees. I guess thats what people want

The point is that the asylum right once granted is valid only in the country that registered it. So, if they would try to move somewhere else they should give away the gained rights and have no rights in the new destination.

What happened in Hungary was practically a situation in which neither the country (clearly stated by Orban several times) nor the refugees wanted to have the registration process started because it would have been bad for both.
 
The point is that the asylum right once granted is valid only in the country that registered it. So, if they would try to move somewhere else they should give away the gained rights and have no rights in the new destination.

What happened in Hungary was practically a situation in which neither the country (clearly stated by Orban several times) nor the refugees wanted to have the registration process started because it would have been bad for both.

My point is that people argued here before that the refugees were safe in Turkey and beyond that country they're considered economic refugees. My question is, is Turkey supposed to take them all?
 
My point is that people argued here before that the refugees were safe in Turkey and beyond that country they're considered economic refugees. My question is, is Turkey supposed to take them all?

Sorry, misunderstood you. It's a moot point. When 200.000 Hungarian fled in 1956, they didn't stay all in Austria and a lot of them went forward, even in US and Canada. Expecting some countries to act as buffers and make all the efforts is illogical ( because the overcrowding will make the situation worse there and it will spill in the end) and egoistic.
 
Sorry but how would this work? If refugees would only stay in the first countries where they would be safe. Europe would have zero refugees. I guess thats what people want

You can stop right now with the whole putting words into peoples mouth thing i am for a fair refugee quota and a reasonable maximum of which we can take in a year its the EU that lacks the balls.
Also a EU quota would end this ridiculous and against EU law idea of demand, riot finally pick and choose (probably Germany) which is a good thing because at that point its no longer about safety but more about economic migration and it destroys the goodwill of the native population that gets rightfully more and more pissed by the day.
 
Not that anybody can call now Turkey a safe country, with all the efforts that Erdogan puts into stirring shit to win a government.
 
Well done for Hungary for taking such serious policy towards refugees, or should I say economic migrants.

Instead of going to to FIRST neighboring county (which is culturally, religiously and linguistically close to these economic migrants), refugees are targeting Germany and Sweden. Something is rotten here.
 
Well done for Hungary for taking such serious policy towards refugees, or should I say economic migrants.

Instead of going to to FIRST neighboring county (which is culturally, religiously and linguistically close to these economic migrants), refugees are targeting Germany and Sweden. Something is rotten here.

Just out of curiosity, where are you from?
 
well Germany can piss off. They've already done enough damage with this publicity stunt.

The actually damage comes from people that think its a good idea to let refugees choose even if it means that at that point its no longer about safety but about economic migrations that completely overwhelms a couple of chosen countries to the point some have to kinda use borders again.
There is currently nothing more ridiculous than that well maybe that Merkel recently invited this.
 
under the current EU system are the smaller countries capable of rejecting the proposed quota numbers?

Yes, they can. If they should is a different question. If they should do it though, the worse case for such small countries would be if Merkel does a Thatcher in the EU question.
 
This is not going to stop until Syria and Irak are stabilized. They are going to come by the millions, most of them only want to make a living, but we don't have the infrastructure to support this flow of refugees is such a short period of time.

This will only stop if Obama reverts his policy of retreating in the middle east. They way Irak was abandoned is at the root of this problem. I'm sure it wont take long until the EU turns to Putin to lead an offensive in Syria. Recent developments point to that.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...o-syria-as-part-of-continued-military-buildup

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34236464
 
What damage?

Sorry are we not in a thread about Germany inviting the world to its doorstep then slamming the door shut? I don't think they're in a position to tell others what to do.

By taking in the most refugees of all EU countries? Yes, a lot of damage done there...

Yeah, great. Opened their borders just enough to give everyone hope then closed them leaving neighbouring countries in the shit.

I'm sure they just building razor wire fences and deploying the military to welcome everyone though. No problems here.
 
Yeah, great. Opened their borders just enough to give everyone hope then closed them leaving neighbouring countries in the shit.

I'm sure they just building razor wire fences and deploying the military to welcome everyone though. No problems here.

They have already taken 400.000 refugees. How much is enough for you?

Edit: BTW THEY HAVENT CLOSED THEIR BORDER, just introducing BORDER CONTROLS, to regulate the inflow of refugees. Stop selling bullshit.

http://www.economist.com/news/europ...rmines-europes-free-movement-policies-germany
 
Sorry are we not in a thread about Germany inviting the world to its doorstep then slamming the door shut? I don't think they're in a position to tell others what to do.



Yeah, great. Opened their borders just enough to give everyone hope then closed them leaving neighbouring countries in the shit.

I'm sure they just building razor wire fences and deploying the military to welcome everyone though. No problems here.

stop beeing hyperbolic. its not helping anyone and you direct you anger into the wrong direction.
 
They have already taken 400.000 refugees. How much is enough for you?

Is that everyone? Because they were out there last week relaxing rules to win a few cheap pr points until the reality of the situation caught up to them.

If Germany wants to take a million people then fine but they don't get to invite people in and then dictate to other countries where they're going.
 
Sorry are we not in a thread about Germany inviting the world to its doorstep then slamming the door shut? I don't think they're in a position to tell others what to do.

Yeah, great. Opened their borders just enough to give everyone hope then closed them leaving neighbouring countries in the shit.

I'm sure they just building razor wire fences and deploying the military to welcome everyone though. No problems here.
What are you talking about? Germany is not building razor wire fences and deploying the military. They have implemented border checks so the stream of refugees can be managed. The other options was to let tens of thousands of people arrive in German cities with nowhere to go from there.

You are confused with Austria, which is using the military to manage some borders, and Hungary, which has closed off its border for now. People can still be let in if they apply, but most will be rejected because Hungary says they are already in a safe country in Serbia.

I think Germany should be applauded for the effort they did put in and the amount of people they are helping right now. Other EU states can certainly be judged for their positions.

Is that everyone? Because they were out there last week relaxing rules to win a few cheap pr points until the reality of the situation caught up to them.

If Germany wants to take a million people then fine but they don't get to invite people in and then dictate to other countries where they're going.
No, that is not everyone. There are millions more in camps in Turkey and Lebanon. There are millions more living unsafely in Syria. There are hundreds of thousands on their way through Greece, Macedonia, Serbia, etc. But you can't just let people come without having the logistics in order and a place to house them, so something had to be done. Would you rather they came to Germany and be left on the street there without help?

They are not dictating where these refugees are going. They want the EU to work together towards a solution, because some countries are not doing their share.

This is not going to stop until Syria and Irak are stabilized. They are going to come by the millions, most of them only want to make a living, but we don't have the infrastructure to support this flow of refugees is such a short period of time.

This will only stop if Obama reverts his policy of retreating in the middle east. They way Irak was abandoned is at the root of this problem. I'm sure it wont take long until the EU turns to Putin to lead an offensive in Syria. Recent developments point to that.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...o-syria-as-part-of-continued-military-buildup

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34236464
I wonder what Russia is going to do. If they go all in and help Assad, will the EU just stand by and secretly happy someone is doing the dirty work?

And apparently a few years ago Russia wasn't that opposed to letting Assad step down. The West thought he would be gone in a few weeks anyway, so rejected it. Of course it is anyone's guess how true this all is and how it would have worked out. http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...offer-in-2012-to-have-syrias-assad-step-aside
 
Is that everyone? Because they were out there last week relaxing rules to win a few cheap pr points until the reality of the situation caught up to them.

If Germany wants to take a million people then fine but they don't get to invite people in and then dictate to other countries where they're going.

soooo, is your issue that the refugees have to stay in your country or...? i don't get it.
 
soooo, is your issue that the refugees have to stay in your country or...? i don't get it.

No. Go back and read what I posted. I'm opposed to other countries forcing their reckless policies on everyone else under a quota. I don't think the UK has done enough but at the same time I don't think doing what Germany has done is the answer (as has been shown). It forced neighbouring countries to use their military to protect their borders because Germany unilaterally made decisions for Europe.
 
From Montenegro. Even though this is my personal opinion, I would say that whole Balkan is sharing more or less the same sentiment towards these "refugees".

lol, not sure about after looking at the numbers of refugees from Balkan in Germany, which was or even still is the largest group here.
 
From Montenegro. Even though this is my personal opinion, I would say that whole Balkan is sharing more or less the same sentiment towards these "refugees".

Yeah, maybe you should check how many people from Balkans chose to seek asylum in Western Europe "instead of going to to FIRST neighboring county (which is culturally, religiously and linguistically close to these economic migrants".

Hypocrisy much?

Edit: just for your future info there are many more refugees in the FIRST neighbouring country (Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan) than in Europe.
 
Yeah, maybe you should check how many people from Balkans choose to seek asylum in Western Europe "instead of going to to FIRST neighboring county (which is culturally, religiously and linguistically close to these economic migrants".

Hypocrisy much?

One would also think that the own history and how other countries took refugees from the region in the 90s would make them a little bit more aware about that problem.
 
One would also think that the own history and how other countries took refugees from the region in the 90s would make them a little bit more aware about that problem.

I already had a selfbet that is someone who doesn't know the history of his own country/region but I didn't expected to be someone from such a recent source of refugees in Europe.
 
Yeah, maybe you should check how many people from Balkans choose to seek asylum in Western Europe "instead of going to to FIRST neighboring county (which is culturally, religiously and linguistically close to these economic migrants".

Hypocrisy much?

Well, the most part of population which was affected by the former war-zone in Balkan region, fled to the neighboring country. Thats a public data and numbers vary across the countries.

If you want to go more into the refugee history of Balkan, Hungarian refugees were also fleeing to the many neighboring countries (for instance the former Yugoslavia).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_and_expulsion_of_Germans_(1944–50)#Hungary

You can also compare the distance between Syria, Balkan and Germany, you come to great conclusions also.
 
Well, the most part of population which was affected by the former war-zone in Balkan region, fled to the neighboring country. Thats a public data and numbers vary across the countries.

If you want to go more into the refugee history of Balkan, Hungarian refugees were also fleeing to the many neighboring countries (for instance the former Yugoslavia).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_and_expulsion_of_Germans_(1944–50)#Hungary

You can also compare the distance between Syria, Balkan and Germany, you come to great conclusions also.

Now read my edit about Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan. And check how many asylum requests from Balkans were in Germany in 2014 and 2015.

Edit:

refugees-and-displaced-people-from-the-former-yugoslavia-since-1991_0c5a.jpg


_85447126_syrian_refugees_all.png


Add some 400k more in Europe between June and now.

Edit 2:

20150328_gdc678.png
 
Refugee/migrant wave is turning from Hungary to Croatia. Police in Serbia is turning refugees from Hungarian border to Croatian. One of Croatia's biggest web portals even started live coverage of situation.
 
No. Go back and read what I posted. I'm opposed to other countries forcing their reckless policies on everyone else under a quota. I don't think the UK has done enough but at the same time I don't think doing what Germany has done is the answer (as has been shown). It forced neighbouring countries to use their military to protect their borders because Germany unilaterally made decisions for Europe.

This post ist just horrible, sorry. Germany was in the end forced to take the asylum seekers, because where else should they have gone? Are you just one of those people who want to make a fortress out of Europe and let those people die in Syria?
A better solution would have been that European countries work together, and that each of them fulfill their duty according to the UN charta they signed, because giving asylum to war refugees is a human right. Instead countries like the UK accept a laughable 20,000 refugees until 2020. Which is a joke and nothing more.
And to be clear: What should happen with all the other refugees who are making their way to Europe regardless? What do you suggest we do with them? Make them go back all the way?

And once again: The German border is not closed, the Schengen agreements provide for the possibility to reinstate border controls temporarily and under special circumstances. Why is this happening? So Germany can manage the asylum seekers within the country, register them, and generally manage the flow of asylum seekers instead of just having them pour into the country and then have them find their own way to some registration center they choose.
 
I'm curious. When the conflict in the area where they are claiming asylum from (warzone, etc) gets it's feet and and order is restored, aren't refugees suppose to be returned to their country of origin?
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfrpwAEMe0c

Video from the hungarian border.
Can't wait to have all that cultural enrichment in Germany.

This whole thing is one massive powder keg waiting to explode, especially now that European countries are starting to enact more restrictions so that people can not continue their journey through Hungary.

It is also a fact that many of these people are not escaping war but are rather trying to find a better environment for themselves. Why would you want to stay in Turkey or in Eastern Europe if there is a chance to reach Sweden or Finland where housing and basic necessities are provided by the state. Take the drowned toddler for example. The family had lived in Turkey for years but the father decided that the trip was worth it, because of the prospect of better health care among other things.

We can't take all these people unless we remove the existing social safety nets and also adapt our labour legislation so that all these people can access the market without waiting years to get all the documentation. Most likely the electorate will not be too happy about that so you can expect to see the nationalist sentiments growing ever stronger.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom